Samsung, according to some reports, is so worried about the build quality-gap between its handsets and devices from HTC and Apple that the company is considering releasing a much higher-quality device in the near future to counter the threat. Next up; 2 Ply plastic on the Galaxy!

There should be an investigation of this happening in every Country where Samsung sells phones. It's gotten so bad that I don't even believe reviews anymore.

I live in Canada and am a customer of a company named Koodo in which I shamefully use an Android phone. Horrible experience but that's beside the point, just counting down the days until I can switch back to iPhone.

Anyway not long ago I decided to go to the Koodo website to check out what some people had to say about the iPhone 5 and to my shock the thing was rated something like 2 or 2-1/2 out of 5 stars with about 30 reviews at the time. So I start reading the reviews one by one only to find that most of the reviews were bogus. The 4 or 5 star reviews where of actual iPhone 5 owners and the others were 1 star reviews bashing iPhone for being the same as the previous models and they should instead buy a galaxy s2 which is a better phone. One guy even had the balls to review using a username in the likeness of AndroidUser.

This is just one example of many many websites with the same results. If you want a good chuckle feel free to visit www.Koodomobile.com and read the reviews. It has since balanced out a little bit but still skewed because of the bogus reviews.

These people are either mentally sick or are compensated somehow. My money would be on it's a combination of both. To put so much effort into trying to persuade people to your agenda for a device requires professional help. For a company to do so is not mentally driven but is unethical but what does Samsung know about ethics.

I saw that too, as I'm also with Koodo. I wouldn't worry about this shitty source of reviews, especially when its based on such a tiny number. More internet trolls with an agenda will give their "opinion" than actual users. The iPhone still demolishes everything in reputable customer satisfaction metrics, like J.D. Power which actually measures these metrics from real users. Online polls are pretty meaningless.

Seems strange to develop on Android first when iOs apps command more revenue and is easier to develop for considering fragmentation. I would do it in reverse.

For most types of apps, fragmentation is no more a worry than it's ever been on mobile devices. There's really only a few basic Android screen categories to worry about, much like there's only a handful of different iOS screens.

For students and hobbyists, Android is less hassle and less costly, as you can first send your app to friends to try out without getting involved in a store at all, and then it only costs a one-time $25 fee to publish. Apple charges $100 each year for paid apps.

As for revenue, sadly, ads on free apps seem to be the best bet everywhere. Companies like Rovio have said they make far more off ad-driven versions than from paid versions. Mobile ads on all platforms brought in around $9 billion revenue last year for developers, vs. the $3.5 billion paid to iOS developers and much less to Android developers.

The best reason to do Android first is probably because if you did something unique, you might be the first.

There are also more Android app categories that are easy to get into, like widgets and wallpapers, and which can be lucrative if done well.

As for revenue, sadly, ads on free apps seem to be the best bet everywhere. Companies like Rovio have said they make far more off ad-driven versions than from paid versions.

My experience has been completely the reverse. For one of my apps which has both a free (feature limited) version that's ad-driven and a paid (full featured) version, I make roughly 10-15x more per day from the paid version.

I recently tried the Android development kit on Mac (after developing apps for iOS for years) and found it to be far more complicated. For example, you need to create a profile for the simulator (memory and storage space size, screen size, etc) before you can even launch it. With the iOS simulator, it comes up with a default configuration, and you can configure those details while it's running (it relaunches with the new settings).

And, because I made the oh-so-obvious mistake of giving my simulated Android device 4GB of storage, it took _forever_ to boot to the home screen. I only realized that it was booting up (instead of waiting for some special gesture to unlock it and get to the home screen) after a bunch more trial and error with the settings which made it boot up faster. Talk about unintuitive.

Also, the Eclipse-based IDE feels so retro 1990s. Given that I've done Linux development using Eclipse in the past, I can fumble my way around the interface. But it's definitely not as polished or intuitive as Xcode. I'd gladly pay a bit more to have a modern IDE which saves me time.

Also, the Eclipse-based IDE feels so retro 1990s. Given that I've done Linux development using Eclipse in the past, I can fumble my way around the interface. But it's definitely not as polished or intuitive as Xcode. I'd gladly pay a bit more to have a modern IDE which saves me time.

Oh for sure, but at least Eclipse runs on lots of machines. (I think there'd be a ton more iOS apps if we could use XCode on PCs.)

I've been using Eclipse for Blackberry, Android and web app development at work for many years, so I'm used to it.

Also, I agree about the simulator. I use actual devices, which I got for cheap off eBay with bad ESNs (which I don't care about, since I use local WiFi for testing.)

By less hassle, I meant it's easier to create an app, and give it to friends or push to your phone without anyone needing a developer profile and all that mess set up. (With iOS, I had to deal with family members losing access to custom apps when they expired once a year.)